Rossi: Let’s Switch from LENR to QUAR

We’ve been discussing the appropriate name for ‘the reaction’ for some time now, and a recent thread here suggested the need for taking the world ‘Nuclear’ out of any label that is used as it could have negative connotations to many people who are wary about nuclear energy mainly because safety reasons. If this technology starts to make news, there could be some headwinds to fight from nuclear energy opponents who could raise concerns about the safety of ‘new nuclear’ energy.

Today on the Journal of Nuclear Physics DT Travchenko asked:

Dr Rossi:
What do you think about the proposal of Mr Estri to change the definition “LENR” into “QUAR” ( Quantum Reactions)?
Warm Regards,
DT

Andrea Rossi responded:

DTravchenko:
Yes, I think is a very good idea, also to take off from LENR the pressure of the “N” letter. Semanthics sometimes count. I will try from now to spell QUAR instead of LENR, and this will be a contribution of the Journal of Nuclear Physics. Therefore: the next Authors are gently invited to use the definition QUAR instead of LENR. Let’s see what happens.
Thank you for your comment,
Warm Regards,
A.R.

There have been lots of names proposed, and so far the ones that have really stuck have been ‘cold fusion’ and LENR. I would have expected them to stay at the head of the pack, but if Andrea Rossi and the E-Cat are leading the way in this field and he starts to use this term, it might catch on — especially if he can get Industrial Heat to start using the term in its publicity materials (assuming they will at some point establish a public presence)

A ‘Quantum Reaction’ is rather a harmless label in my opinion, and I think it sounds sufficiently futuristic and exotic to be applied to a new form of energy. The Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project’s web site is called quantumheat.org, which is similar to this proposed label. Rossi seems to be satisfied that the source of the E-Cat’s energy is generated at the quantum level, so the QUAR label could be an accurate one, too.

  • Hope4Dbest

    Embarrassed, Frank?

    • Veblin

      How do you figure you punked anyone. I posted a couple of months ago that you were someone trolling from ECN, though I was not sure who. My reply to you was up for about 8 hours before Frank deleted it. I guess Frank thought it was too negative about you to be left up, but I am sorry you missed it.
      Frank knew.

      So you will no longer be Pierre Ordinaire with Greenwin Says comments?
      No more Hope4Dbest and your other names.
      Hector McNuget?

      • Hope4Dbest

        Oh, so your prophecy was deleted? And you cannot show it to us?

        Don’t worry, hindsight is 20/20. And considering the IQ of this site, a lot of people are going to believe you.

        Veblin. I’ve been here for months and I don’t recall your name. But enjoy your 15 minutes of fame before Frank deletes all of this.

        Let me guess: you have a magnetic motor too.

  • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

    one idea if Ed Storms have a good theory :

    Hydroton reactor
    Hydroton energy
    Hydroton effect
    plug your Hydro’ jack

    if not Cold Fusion, LENR, the name can go from the theory

  • http://www.drboblog.com Doctor Bob

    Hydrogen Fuel Cell or Hydrogen Power Cell is good names

  • Kevin O

    Lattice Assisted Fleischmann Pons Heat Effect Reactor
    LAFPHER
    He who laughs last, laughs loudest

    • Kevin O

      A previous incarnation of this was

      High Output Anomalous Heat Pons Fleischmann Low Energy Nuclear Effect in Solid State

      HOAHPFLENESS

    • Ted-X

      Just shorten it to Fleishman-Pons-Effect-Reactor, which abbreviates to FPER.
      It would be easier to remember, gives tribute to Fleishman and Pons andtakes into account that the main effect may not be nuclear, as Rossi stated (quite likely zero-point energy emerging in nano-cavities due to Casimir forces).

  • gautea

    What this really is = global rescue unit = GRU

  • Christopher Calder

    I don’t think this is going anywhere. If you want to call it Quantum Reactions, you should abbreviate it as just QR. Thus an automobile running on Quantum Reaction power could be described as having a *QR* drive. That sounds a billion times better than the ridiculous and awkward “QUAR.” LENR is just fine, however.

  • Iggy Dalrymple

    LENR = LowEnergiNnocuousReaction

  • Ted-X

    Perhaps… FPER…
    Fleishman-Pons-Effect Reactor
    * Gives tribute to Fleishman and Pons
    * Does not go into the details of the effect (the details and the theory is still not clear)
    * Is brief

  • Omega Z

    Controlled flight into terrain

    Layman definition. “Crash”

  • Gordon Docherty

    Thinking / praying about this one for a while. How about:

    a VERSATILE system?

    And what, exactly, does VERSATILE stand for. Well, it’s a very exact description of what makes these systems work :

    Virtual-particle Energy-transfer Resonance within a Supersaturated-metal-hydride forming an Active Tesseract Ionic Lattice Environment

    (Virtual-particle = Quasi-particle, but, aside from QP-DOLL, it’s hard to do anything with QP!)

    and also emphasizes one of these systems’ critical success factors:

    Versatility

    It’s a friendly, familiar word that speaks of safety, thrift, flexibility. Marketing would love it…

    Please suggest to A.R.

  • Barry8

    I doubt the word “nuclear” is going to hamper LENR from going viral once a product comes to market.

    • Omega Z

      In Rossi’s latest post, It appears he has taken to the new acronym. Maybe he considers it to be a more accurate description of what is happening.

      “We are talking of QUAR, or LENR in generic sense, not just for the E-Cat, anyway.”

  • Andrew

    I agree. The mainstream can call it fluffy white bunny reactions and I will forever call it cold fusion.

  • RogerKnights

    Spread it around!

  • Alan DeAngelis

    I just don’t get it.
    If the hot fusion gang came up with this, the word NUCLEAR would be on the front page of the New York Times. I think this approach is totally wrong. Instead of hiding the fact that it’s nuclear, make it its selling point. A completely SAFE form of nuclear energy has been discovered!

  • Gerrit

    My proposal is to switch from “report not published” to “report published” and from “no plant in operation” to “plant in operation”. We’ll sort out the naming after that.

    • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

      yes!

      and I bet old will became popular when it will be officially working.

  • wpj

    Very sensible!

    This is the reason why hospitals now use MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) rather than NMRI (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging). The “N” word was very off-putting to patients even tough it was referring to the nucleus of the water molecules (well, specifically the hydrogens).

    We chemists still analyse the structure of molecules using NMR which allows us to see the hydrogens and how they are connected.